Mexican Army Sourcebook complete

[Webstral]

Remarkably like the Russian situation, no?

Some of the PRI folks responsible for the war must have survived the strikes on Mexico City. Otherwise, the surviving federal government would have ended the whole thing as a bad deal and brought the troops home. Someone wanted Mexican troops in the US--even after the limited strikes.

This makes me wonder whether the Soviet respresentatives in Mexico simply lied to the Mexican President (or his successor) about Soviet nuclear retaliation against the US. By mid-1998, most strikes inside the US will be rather difficult for the Mexicans to confirm. If the US only employs one strategic package--and if the Soviets have the brass to make the claim--the Soviets can tell the Mexican President that Soviet strikes in the US have dissuaded the Americans from further nuclear use.

Also, I'm not sure it is necessary to incinerate the city to destroy rail hubs. I'm not an expert on low-yield nukes, but I wonder if a 10-20kt ground burst against a rail yard would cause a firestorm or irradiate the city. I suppose the effects will vary from city to city based on a variety of factors.


Webstral

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Webstral

Also, I'm not sure it is necessary to incinerate the city to destroy rail hubs. I'm not an expert on low-yield nukes, but I wonder if a 10-20kt ground burst against a rail yard would cause a firestorm or irradiate the city.

Hiroshima - 13-18kt
Nagasaki - 21kt

Low yield yes, but both bombs where more than enough to totally flatten both cities.

[Webstral]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Hiroshima - 13-18kt
Nagasaki - 21kt

Low yield yes, but both bombs where more than enough to totally flatten both cities.

Very true, but these attacks were airbursts. A ground burst is a different creature. Also, the location of the target's rail hub relative to the city makes a difference. If the rail hub is at city center, then the effects on the city will be much more pronounced than if the rail yards are near the outskirts. Also, Japanese cities were very tindery. If the target city has more brick and cinder block construction than a WW2-era Japanese city, the blast damage will be lessened. It's worth noting, too, that the loss of life at Hiroshima was greater than at Nagasaki, despite the higher yield of the Fat Man. The layout of the city and density of its population affect the impact of a given nuclear explosion. While I don't doubt that a 10kt ground burst at city center would result in major loss of life, a 10kt ground burst away from the city center in a city with some topographical features to deflect blast and heat and a high percentage of stone, brick, or cinder block housing will not have the same effects.

All of this said, a little research into the specifics at the major northern Mexican rail hubs should help answer some of the questions. I'll have to see if I can find a rail map of Mexico.


Webstral

[kalos72]

I always assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that an air burst was for more of an EMP / firestorm of oil refineries and such then any true damage. And a ground burst was for more physical direct damage and radiation...

[Legbreaker]

Regardless of air burst, ground burst, or target city layout, etc you're never going to be able to call a nuclear explosive a "precision attack"....

[Dog 6]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Regardless of air burst, ground burst, or target city layout, etc you're never going to be able to call a nuclear explosive a "precision attack"....

very true. even the smallest nukes. .01 kt will still blow the shit out of the heart of any city.

[headquarters]

with how amny tens of millions of Mexican background citizens and other south American citizens in the US - would using WMDs against the estados unidas de Mexico -and especially the big cities-be an option?

What could a possible backlash be ?

The need to evict any occupying force in a big hurry might not be there from a JCS chess game perspective.

Allowing the invaders to weaken over some time and then try to
a)bribe units and commanders
b) force them out through conventional warfare
c) limited use of WMDs to cut supply lines/build up areas

just a thought..